Coca-Cola Rhetorical Analysis
,Although trademarks are extremely prevalent in modern culture, determining who has the rights to a particular slogan can often be challenging. The given selection of letters between Mr. Herbert of the Coca-Cola Company and Mr. Seaver of Grove Press highlight this ambiguity. Both companies have used the slogan, “It’s the Real Thing” in advertising, and a conflict has ensued to determine the rights to the slogan. While both representatives use various rhetorical strategies to lay claim to the right to use the slogan, Mr. Seaver of Grove Press makes a more convincing argument by effective rebuttal of Mr. Herbert’s arguments and superior use of rhetorical devices. In a letter to Mr. Seaver of Grove Press, …show more content…
Seaver is also able to reduce Mr. Herbert’s argument to the absurd and use wit and humor to provide a more persuasive argument. Mr. Herbert wrote in his letter that “simultaneous use of ‘the real thing’” would lead to advertising competition, have a negative effect on the economic viability of both companies, and “dilute the distinctiveness” and “diminish the effectiveness” of the slogan due to confusion between the different products making use of the slogan. Contrary to this argument, Mr. Seaver wittingly suggests that confusion between the products might actually help the Coca-Cola Company’s business, as people might buy Coke rather than Grove Press’ book. This comical suggestion illustrates the absurdity of confusing a book with a soft drink. He reduces Mr. Herbert’s argument to the absurd by following a line of logic to an unreasonable conclusion. This humorous response undermines Mr. Herbert’s staid argument and is a very persuasive tool that Mr. Seaver uses. By challenging Mr. Herbert’s appeal to tradition with his own appeal, and reducing Mr. Herbert’s argument to the absurd in a witty manner, Mr. Seaver is able to offer a persuasive case in support of Grove Press’ right to utilize “It’s the Real Thing” in their advertising. Despite the fact that Mr. Herbert likely has a more logical stance on the issue, Mr. Seaver uses wit and quick thinking to respond to Mr. Herbert’s argument and to make an overall more persuasive
,Although trademarks are extremely prevalent in modern culture, determining who has the rights to a particular slogan can often be challenging. The given selection of letters between Mr. Herbert of the Coca-Cola Company and Mr. Seaver of Grove Press highlight this ambiguity. Both companies have used the slogan, “It’s the Real Thing” in advertising, and a conflict has ensued to determine the rights to the slogan. While both representatives use various rhetorical strategies to lay claim to the right to use the slogan, Mr. Seaver of Grove Press makes a more convincing argument by effective rebuttal of Mr. Herbert’s arguments and superior use of rhetorical devices. In a letter to Mr. Seaver of Grove Press, …show more content…
Seaver is also able to reduce Mr. Herbert’s argument to the absurd and use wit and humor to provide a more persuasive argument. Mr. Herbert wrote in his letter that “simultaneous use of ‘the real thing’” would lead to advertising competition, have a negative effect on the economic viability of both companies, and “dilute the distinctiveness” and “diminish the effectiveness” of the slogan due to confusion between the different products making use of the slogan. Contrary to this argument, Mr. Seaver wittingly suggests that confusion between the products might actually help the Coca-Cola Company’s business, as people might buy Coke rather than Grove Press’ book. This comical suggestion illustrates the absurdity of confusing a book with a soft drink. He reduces Mr. Herbert’s argument to the absurd by following a line of logic to an unreasonable conclusion. This humorous response undermines Mr. Herbert’s staid argument and is a very persuasive tool that Mr. Seaver uses. By challenging Mr. Herbert’s appeal to tradition with his own appeal, and reducing Mr. Herbert’s argument to the absurd in a witty manner, Mr. Seaver is able to offer a persuasive case in support of Grove Press’ right to utilize “It’s the Real Thing” in their advertising. Despite the fact that Mr. Herbert likely has a more logical stance on the issue, Mr. Seaver uses wit and quick thinking to respond to Mr. Herbert’s argument and to make an overall more persuasive